Then the Venerable Ananda approached the Blessed One, paid homage to him, sat down to one side, and said to him:“Venerable sir, it is said, ‘cessation, cessation (nirodha).’ Through the cessation of what things is cessation spoken of?”“Form, Ananda, is impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen, subject to destruction, to vanishing, to fading away, to cessation. Through its cessation, cessation is spoken of.

I always told myself I had no need to learn Pali, but I find myself absorbed all this day, with some of the effort I usually put into poetry, in referencing etymologies of the Pali terms used in the sutta extract Zom quoted. Of course I don't think what I've written is a translation, it's just that I've spent the day on it, and it's here.

Basically I've tried to make the language less formal and latinate/cold, and more heartfelt. Which obviously obscures the technical aspects, while emphasising the poetic. From what I can make out, Pali doesn't have so much of a contrast between technical and poetic language as English, therefore it's possible that any single wording of the suttas in English will lack one of the strengths of the original.

Then the contemplative Ananda paid homage to the Blessed One, sat at his side, and said:“Venerable, you speak of 'yielding’. What must yield?”

“Form, Ananda, is fleeting, oppressed, arisen in bondage, fragile, given to passing, to unbinding, to yielding.Form must yield...

“Feeling is fleeting… seeing is fleeting… the fruits of will are fleeting… … knowing is fleeting, oppressed, arisen in bondage, fragile, given to passing, to unbinding, to yieldingAll of these must yield."

I got interested in the etymology of the word, which seems to support interpretations of backing down and letting go, which would allow a poetic usage of the word 'yielding', if not a direct translation. I did quite a lot of checking and actually have a post of references already written, though being utterly unqualified I already feel a little presumptious in posting my rewording of the sutta, so I'll only continue babbling if anyone is interested.

Ajahn Sumedho in 'The Four Noble Truths' wrote:Usually we equate suffering with feeling, but feeling is not suffering. It is the grasping of desire that is suffering. Desire does not cause suffering; the cause of suffering is the grasping of desire. This statement is for reflection and contemplation in terms of your individual experience.

Dmytro wrote:The varieties of nirodha (cessation) are explained in Nettippakarana:

Here is some out loud thinking: Nirodha is the cessation of the 12 links of dependent origination including ignorance, clinging, and suffering. What is left after such cessation? The bliss of nirvana, the unconditioned, the deathless, accompanied by a sense of fulfillment, of the task being done, the knowledge "released".

429. 'Cessation' is a unity. Herein, what is cessation? It is deliberate cessation, undeliberate cessation[1], cessation of approval, cessation of resistance; cessation of conceit, cessation of contempt, cessation of domineering, cessation of envy, cessation of avarice, cessation of all defilements. This is a diversity.

[1] 'Paṭisankhā-nirodha—deliberate cessation' and 'appaṭisankhānirodha—undeliberate cessation': neither compound is in PED and latter not in CPD (Vol. 1); see Kv. 226 and Kv. trsln. ('Points of Controversy') 137, note; also Miln. (cf. also Pe 151, line 15 nirodhasaṃpatti(m) appaṭisankhāya). NettiA says 'Paṭisankhānirodha is cessation due to deliberating (patisankhāya), due to keeping in being opposition (to arising—paṭipakkhabhāvanāya); or when opposition has not occurred in that way, it is the non-arising of what is ready to arise, owing to opposition to its arising being already in existence. Appaṭisankhānirodha is the cessation of determined ideas along with their individual natures: what is meant is cessation from moment to moment' (p. 109). That these two terms should be present here and absent from the Pe is noteworthy. The second, according to NettiA, means the cessation incessantly taking place in the process of impermanence. Cf. KvA (Burm. ed., p. 140) and KvAA (Burm. ed., p. 56). There seems no reason for supposing that the later independent Sanskrit Mahāyāna development of these terms is in any way implied here (for which see, e.g., O. Rosenberg, Die Probleme der Buddhistischen Philosophie, Heidelberg, 1924, p. 128; E. Obermiller, The Doctrine of Prajñāpāramitā, Leningrad, 1932; and E. Lamotte, Histoire du Bouddhisme Indien, Louvain, 1958, p. 675).

yielding, as a dam or the banks of a river yield (ni, out) (rudha, riverbanks... receding banks?) as an obstruction yields (ni, without) (rodha, obstruction), as a person obstructing yields (ni, vanishing action) (rodha, obstruction), as a person backs down and yields from an attempt to ascend (ni, reverting of an upwards motion/vanishing of an action) (rudha, banks, denoting a confined path of action), yields possessions (ni, being without, not having) (rodha obstruction).

Also connotations of release and freedom (ni, out), leaving confinement (rudha, banks/dam), and fruition e.g. the cage yielded a flock of birds.

I'm not looking at definitions here so much as making very speculative guesses as to the possible resonance of the word when used in certain contexts, as no translation effort will find an equivalent for all contexts. English words have all sorts of resonances which we are not always aware of, which makes the art of translation an art, not a science.

Translators from all sorts of languages to English have a tendency to use formal, technical sounding latinate vocabulary as general equivalents of words in other languages, since the more complex resonances of Anglo-Saxon derived words are ideosyncratic and, essentially, will make the text their own, which a careful scribe may wish to avoid in order to preserve technical correctness. However, as an exercise, reimagining a text may be worthwhile.

Well, off topic actually... unless of course, this is a claim that these posts of yours are among the allegedly über-rare cases of 'correct', in which case that would be somewhat germane to explore...

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]

[1] 'Paṭisankhā-nirodha—deliberate cessation' and 'appaṭisankhānirodha—undeliberate cessation': neither compound is in PED and latter not in CPD (Vol. 1); see Kv. 226 and Kv. trsln. ('Points of Controversy') 137, note; also Miln. (cf. also Pe 151, line 15 nirodhasaṃpatti(m) appaṭisankhāya). NettiA says 'Paṭisankhānirodha is cessation due to deliberating (patisankhāya), due to keeping in being opposition (to arising—paṭipakkhabhāvanāya); or when opposition has not occurred in that way, it is the non-arising of what is ready to arise, owing to opposition to its arising being already in existence. Appaṭisankhānirodha is the cessation of determined ideas along with their individual natures: what is meant is cessation from moment to moment' (p. 109). That these two terms should be present here and absent from the Pe is noteworthy. The second, according to NettiA, means the cessation incessantly taking place in the process of impermanence. Cf. KvA (Burm. ed., p. 140) and KvAA (Burm. ed., p. 56). There seems no reason for supposing that the later independent Sanskrit Mahāyāna development of these terms is in any way implied here (for which see, e.g., O. Rosenberg, Die Probleme der Buddhistischen Philosophie, Heidelberg, 1924, p. 128; E. Obermiller, The Doctrine of Prajñāpāramitā, Leningrad, 1932; and E. Lamotte, Histoire du Bouddhisme Indien, Louvain, 1958, p. 675).

Pratisaṃkhyānirodha and apratisaṃkhyānirodha are given in both the Dharmaskandha-śāstra and the Prakaraṇapāda-śāstra of the Sarvāstivāda Abhidharmapiṭaka, and therefore predate any Sanskrit Mahāyāna development by a number of centuries.

The textual history of the Nettipakaraṇa is a matter of speculation, but it and the Peṭakopadesa may have been composed or influenced by exegetical traditions other than those who composed and redacted the texts in the Pāli Abhidhammapiṭaka as we now have them.